GSG 92 CO2 BB pistol: Part 3

by B.B. Pelletier

Part 1
Part 2


The GSG 92 is a very realistic action BB pistol from an airsoft manufacturer.

Today, I’ll test the accuracy of this GSG 92 CO2 BB pistol, and believe me, there has been more interest in this gun in any BB gun I’ve seen in a long time. Not all of the interest is focused on this gun, but I’ll address that later in the report.

As you may recall from the velocity test, this pistol gets about 40 usable shots per 12-gram CO2 cartridge. I kept that in mind as the test progressed, and I never let the gun get too low on power. I also waited for at least 10 seconds between each shot to allow the gun to recover from the cooling effect of the gas. The GSG 92 seems very sensitive to a power loss if you shoot the gun too fast.

The first shots were from only 10 feet to establish where the sights were. Since the sights are fixed and even molded into the slide, there’s no possibility for sight adjustment, so it’s important to know where the gun shoots.

I found the pistol groups lower than the aim point and just slightly to the left. However, with these sights, a 6 o’clock hold on the bull is the most accurate way of sighting, so I simply aimed at a bull above where I expected the shots to land. That worked very well for my shooting, which was done at 15 feet.

I tried to hold the pistol in one hand, but I’m not strong enough to do the gun justice that way, so I sat on the floor and used a two-handed hold with my arms rested on the back of a small chair. I know these groups you are about to see are the very best I can do with this pistol.

I installed a fresh CO2 cartridge and loaded the magazine with Daisy Premium Grade zinc-plated BBs. I know from many past tests that these are among the most accurate BBs in all BB pistols, so I went right to the best. That way, I could concentrate on the other things and not worry about ammunition.

Once the gun was sighted-in at 15 feet, I knew it would shoot about 2 inches low and .25 inches to the left. The shooting could now begin. The first target was shot with a 10-second pause between each shot, to allow time for the gun to recover its temperature. At 15 feet, though, the difference of 30 or even 50 f.p.s. doesn’t really have much of an impact.

The first group seemed to be a good one, and it doesn’t look too bad after all is said and done. But I felt I could do better, so I shot a second group.


The first target caught this satisfying 10-shot group that measures 1.173 inches between the centers of the two shots farthest apart.

After the first group, I settled down and started focusing on the front sight, as you’re supposed to. I noticed that the next group was better, but still about the same amount below the point of aim. This group measures 0.914 inches between centers.


The second target was shot with more focus on the front sight. It measures 0.914 inches between centers for 10 shots.

I checked my past tests of BB pistols, and only the Umarex Makarov beat this one. I think I know why. This GSG 92 has realistic blowback that really bounces the pistol when it fires. I think the movement of the slide might make the difference between this one and the Mak.

The bottom line
For those who were thinking about getting a GSG 92, I would say go ahead. My tests demonstrated a very realistic and accurate performance, and the velocity exceeded factory claims. The one drawback is the low shot count, but for that price you’re getting one very realistic recoiling airgun.

It doesn’t end here
Here’s the rest of the story. While commenting on this gun, a couple readers got into a discussion about the SIG Sauer P226 X5 pistol. The claims for accuracy that were made seemed astounding to me, and since this was the first time in a long time that anyone has championed a BB pistol, I ordered one to test for you. The story continues.

25 thoughts on “GSG 92 CO2 BB pistol: Part 3

  1. I’m getting one as soon as back from vacation (in two weeks).
    I was plinking a bit with the tanfoglio et SIG Sauer yesterday, the tanfoglio has decent accuracy at 30 feet but the SIG really seems to shoot better but I still prefer the 1911, I have a few action and everytime I handle a few of them regardless of the age or sex a LOT prefer the grip of the 1911, i gun that was created a 100 years ago, I’m still amased by that. Anyways back to the pistols, the 1911 isn’t too loud but the SIG… that is one LOUD pistol!!!

    I really like those cybergun pistols and I can’t wait to try the 92.

    J-F


  2. whoa! what happened here? only 1 reply this late (11:15 am cst)? Has every one been kidnapped by aliens?

    This seems to be a nice BB gun, but I would like to see a nice accurate pellet gun which would fire about 10 shots semi-automatically. Don’t like bb guns because of the bounce which could be serious in my basement.

    Guess I could use lead bb’s in it. Could I BB?


    • pcp4me,

      I wouldn’t suggest lead balls in this gun. The only airguns I shoot them in are those that have rifled barrels, like the Drozd, and the smoothbores I know are made for them, like the Haenel 310.

      B.B.


  3. Considering the cost of 40 shots with the firearm version, the cost of a C02 makes this a reasonable option for in-home training.
    Victor


    • Are these CO2 blowback pistols really a good training tool for ‘real’ firearms? In other words, can I train on a pistol like this and then think I’d have some level of competency in handling a firearm? I’ve heard this idea of using these as a training device and always wondered about the reality of it.


      • Fused,

        That’s a good question. I’ve never tried one of these air pistols that are suppose to simulate the look, feel, and blow-back of a matching firearm, but reviews that I’ve read seem to indicate that they are good for practice off the range. B.B., and others, can better answer your question.

        My personal opinion, having informally trained people with pistol, is that any amount of training is beneficial, especially for learning the fundamentals. I’ve taken people out to the range, just to watch them do horribly (although they had a blast). Then I take them home, and watch them do exactly the same mistakes with a similar air-pistol. From this, I can work with them to correct those common mistakes. I’m talking similar, but not replica’s like this particular pistol. I would imagine that the better an air-pistol simulates the “real thing”, the better. Again, I’ve never shot an air-pistol with blow-back, but I can’t imagine how it would hurt, and more realistically, I’m sure it helps.

        An important point regarding pistol ownership is that it be practiced with. There’s no substitute for this, and in my opinion, it may even be dangerous to not get very familiar with it, especially for home protection. That last thing you want is to have a gun that will startle you in a critical situation. Having a gun with blow-back can only help reduce some of the “surprise factor” during practice at home. That’s why they these pistols make sense to me. I shoot with my family all the time, so we’re use to both rifles and pistols.

        Victor


      • Fused,

        There absolutely IS a transfer from training with airguns! And, there is also a transfer from training with firearms.

        The airgun teaches good trigger control, good sight picture and good follow-through. The firearm reinforces good follow-through, and good trigger work.

        What I find at the firearms range is a lot of shooters come out expecting that their time at the range is training time. Most of them come so infrequently that the time would better be called familiarization and they could stand a hundred more hours on the trigger before the next time they return.

        B.B.


        • Fused,

          I own a Mauser HSC which is a 380 (9mm Kurz or short) and my recollection of shooting this is a very mild recoiling firearm. In fact, the torque reaction from the bullet / rifling interface was more noticeable than the recoil. Of course, I used to trade off shooting this, my High Standard 22 and my .45 ACP. Now that had a nice ‘kick’ to it.

          Fred PRoNJ


        • B.B.,

          You make some good points here pertaining to fundamentals. Air guns are VERY good for that. In addition to this, the absolute best shooters in the world dry-fire, so having recoil isn’t always necessarily the best thing. Recoil will mask a lot of a shooters mistakes. So we’re really talking about two things; mastering fundamentals, and gaining training time with a gun that simulates the “real thing” to help with the “surprise factor”. And, yes, range time can be very precious, so being to practice at home has real benefits.

          Victor


      • I have used the tanfoglio 1911 to help me with just practicing clearing my holster as well as basic safety and shooting drills. I will stand by the fact that nothing will ever replace the real thing, how ever, this was a very very good supplement to add in to my training. I am currently waiting on the GSG 92 for the same reason. the weight of the 1911 is almost exact, which is my hope for the 92.


  4. Fused, I’ve shot both the Umarex PPK/s b.b. gun and the .380 version (the real deal).
    A difference to be sure, but not as much as one would think…I’d say the Umerex is an excellent training aid.
    As for GSG92 I imagine it would be a bit more of a stretch. The .380 is pretty anemic. The real 9mm I would imagine having much more ‘kick’ than the b.b. version.


    • CSD,

      Of course you are right that the 9mm has more kick than a .380, but a lot depends on the gun. A PPK/S in .380 is a violent, bitey little thing, while a CZ 75 in 9mm is a big old loafer with very little kick. The best of all might be the Beretta 92 that kicks so little everyone who shoots it loves it.

      Contrast that with a Kel-Tek .380 that stings your hand every time it fires because the contact area is so much smaller.

      B.B.


      • B.B.
        I agree, most 380 pistols sting like a bee. My 45 acp is a lot more comfortable to shoot than my 380 Taurus.
        Loren


      • I know absolutely nothing about firearms. I have heard mentioned on this blog repeatedly the 1911, which I understand comes in different calibers and from different manufacturers. The 1911 seems to be the basis for hand grip design of several reviewed air pistols as well. It seems to have a loyal following and I assume would be a good place to start. So, if I were thinking of a 1911 in some format or another, what would be a good air pistol to get in order to train myself in the art of pistol shooting? I guess the priorities would be realism of action/blowback, accuracy so that I don’t frustrate myself, and I think it makes sense as mentioned above to stick with pellets for safety in my basement. Any suggestions?


        • Strangely — one of the better AirSoft models might be better suited… How many pellet models are their that have a blow-back cycle; most (if not all) pellet pistols use small revolver style magazines and a double action trigger pull.

          High grade AirSoft balls aren’t that expensive — and you can even obtain biodegradable types so working targets in the back yard is feasible…

          http://www.pyramydair.com/s/m/Caspian_Hi-Capa_5_1_Green_Gas_Pistol/1394
          is just a sample; as I recall, adjustable “target” sights rather than the fixed wedge carry sights… Tricky part is figuring out who the manufacturer is for some of these — many are sold under the name of the firearm maker (the real Caspian Arms is a specialist in custom 1911 slides/parts). ["green gas", at least the stuff I have, is a form of propane with lubricant in aerosol state -- it replaced the original mid-80's use of Freon]


        • Fused,

          So many air pistols come to mind. The Beeman P17 for starters. And the P1.

          The Umarex Colt 1911 will give you the best feel for the ultimate firearm, though it isn’t as accurate as the first two.

          B.B.


          • BB,
            I have small hands. Could you recommend a good air pistol that would serve as a firearm “trainer” that would be a good fit?
            Thanks,
            Lloyd


            • Lloyd,

              The Makarov comes to mind. As long as you are satisfied with groups and not pinpoint accuracy, the Mak is sized right and is also very accurate for a BB pistol.

              In a pellet pistol the possibilities are limited. I guess the Walther CP88 might be a good choice.

              B.B.


  5. Off topic (way off).
    Spent an enjoyable couple of days in the village of Vilna, Alberta (pop 274) for their annual ‘Cowboy Fest…a Weekend of Cowboy Music and Poetry’
    Listened to the likes of Harry Rusk, a full blood Slavey Indian who played for 20 years in the Grande Ole Oprey band, and Ed Brown a proffessional rodeo cowboy turned poet and others.
    Lots of talk of cowboys, horses, and of course…six-guns.
    I know it’s looking at the past through rose colored glasses…but it seemed a much better, kinda fullfilling time to be alive (though I’m sure if you were down and out, or a minority it was a lot harder).
    The only downside is that to get my boys to attend this with dear old dad…dad has to sit through a metal concert this Saturday ;-)


    • CSD,
      If you’re boys WANT you to join them at a metal concert, then you’ve done something right. Good job!
      Victor


  6. Am I right in surmising that the “GSG” stands for Grenzschutz Gruppe, the federal German border guards, and in particular the legendary GSG-9 special ops group? Is the GSG a copy of the GSG-9 sidearm?

    pete



  7. B.B.

    I will stay off of the nerf pellet topic and ask something else.

    Have you found a degree of tightness that a breakbarrel should generally have at the hinge joint….
    as in how much pressure is required to swing a cocked barrel to maintain accuracy, or is it so rifle dependent that there is no rule of thumb?

    twotalon


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


+ 6 = 8

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>